Not to be confused with OMNIBUS! Really, I just like having a place to drop my tidbits throughout the season without worrying about them being on target for some other thread.

Starting off, Pew Research released a poll the other day showing Obama up 10 points nationally. Everyone on both sides said "Maybe he's up, but he's not THAT up..." Since then, we have two polls out today; a CNN poll showing Obama +7 and a Fox News poll showing him up (gasp!) +9. [Edit: Reuters had him +7 as well early this week]. Now granted Gallup is only at +2 and Rasmussen is laughably off in Weirdsville with Romney +4 (although they actually admitted to an Obama lead the last couple days before doing a sudden one day six point swing) but whatever the Chicago camp is doing is obviously working.

Theophany wrote:YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU. someproteinguy wrote:Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist. Astarin wrote:One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.

Oh wait, it's because it's all divided up into those electoral votes of course. I wasn't aware of that since we don't have anything similar here. (Or even a president, at all)

____________________________

Theophany wrote:YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU. someproteinguy wrote:Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist. Astarin wrote:One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.

Obama's been consistently around 330 EV's for the last month. He's got all the major swing states right now, and he could lose Florida and Virginia and still win it. NOT THAT YOU PEOPLE SHOULD BE GETTING COMPLACENT.

Obama's been consistently around 330 EV's for the last month. He's got all the major swing states right now, and he could lose Florida and Virginia and still win it. NOT THAT YOU PEOPLE SHOULD BE GETTING COMPLACENT.

What do you mean "you people"?

edit: Obviously shouldn't have gotten distracted by thiefx's ridiculous huffington links and left this tab unsent.

Dem's are being significantly oversampled in those polls though. Add in the short term effects of the sorts of attacks the left has been leveling at Obama, and the general distraction from the issues voters actually care most about, and you'd be pretty foolish to believe those results. Polling traditionally swings widely with the week to week news cycles this early in a race. Moreso in this election than most because the Dems are in the rare position of defending an incumbent and his record so incredibly bad that they've settled on an "all negative all the time" strategy (and it doesn't hurt that the media helps to make sure those news cycles work for them).

The numbers will firm up as we get closer to November and people will remember that current unemployment numbers, welfare figures, and GDP growth figures matter a lot more to them than why one person lost their health care 10 years ago, or how many years of tax returns someone makes public.

Sure, everyone is always oversampling Democrats according to you. Actually, Fox News' polling team is suggesting that there's simply more self identifying Democrats these days based on multiple polling samples.

And week to week polling aggregates haven't swung widely at all. I have no idea where you picked up that feel good theory from.

But then I remember all your "lessons" on polling from 2008 so you just keep whistling part the graveyard

Sure, everyone is always oversampling Democrats according to you. Actually, Fox News' polling team is suggesting that there's simply more self identifying Democrats these days based on multiple polling samples.

"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin

And a whole lot of other people. All those people saying that he can't really be up by that much? Oversampling is the most common explanation they give for why.

Quote:

Actually, Fox News' polling team is suggesting that there's simply more self identifying Democrats these days based on multiple polling samples.

I'd need a cite for that, because it's the first I've heard it. What I've been hearing (from multiple sources) is that general polls showing Dem party identity (at least among voters) is lower this time around. One of the criticisms of polling that's been going on for months now (not just in the last week or so as your OP suggests) is that polling is sampling Democrats at a rate higher than they voted in the last election, and the conventional wisdom is that he had a high point of Dem identity and votes in 2008.

Now it's possible that conventional wisdom is all wrong, but it seems unlikely for Obama to have more support behind him and more people identifying as Democrat this time around given the demonstrably poor job he's done.

I'll point out that an additional angle here is differences between polls of likely voters and polls of the general public. Again, I've been pretty busy and haven't really been paying attention to this issue lately, but the tidbits I've picked up over the last month or so have all pointed in the direction of oversampling, not just of Democrats in general, but significantly with regard to likely Democrat voters.

Quote:

And week to week polling aggregates haven't swung widely at all. I have no idea where you picked up that feel good theory from.

Obama wasn't polling 10 points up a few weeks ago. People then were saying he was polling high and pointing to oversampling as the cause.

Actually, Fox News' polling team is suggesting that there's simply more self identifying Democrats these days based on multiple polling samples.

I'd need a cite for that, because it's the first I've heard it.

Well, there's a surprise.

Fox News wrote:

While Democrats typically hold a slight edge over Republicans nationally in party identification, this attitude shifts based on events and changing sentiment. These days, voters seem to be even more likely to consider themselves Democrats than Republicans. There has been a five percentage-point Democratic advantage, on average, in Fox News polls this year. In this poll, the Democratic edge is nine points. That may or may not be on the high side, although it is similar to other recent national polls conducted by NBC News and the Wall Street Journal, which puts Democrats up 11 percentage points and the Pew Research Center, with Democrats up by 13 percent.

I'm skipping on quibbling the rest with you based on how hilariously wrong you were about all the polling throughout the last election.

Think Romney will put California in play this cycle like McCain did in 2008?

Fun fact! According to the NYT, this ad hasn't been shown as a paid ad once. Everyone who has seen it has seen it either via Youtube or connected to some media story. There's no advertising like free advertising!

Fun fact! According to the NYT, this ad hasn't been shown as a paid ad once. Everyone who has seen it has seen it either via Youtube or connected to some media story. There's no advertising like free advertising!

This happened with a Romney Super PAC add a few months ago, didn't it?

Actually, Fox News' polling team is suggesting that there's simply more self identifying Democrats these days based on multiple polling samples.

I'd need a cite for that, because it's the first I've heard it.

Well, there's a surprise.

Fox News wrote:

While Democrats typically hold a slight edge over Republicans nationally in party identification, this attitude shifts based on events and changing sentiment. These days, voters seem to be even more likely to consider themselves Democrats than Republicans. There has been a five percentage-point Democratic advantage, on average, in Fox News polls this year. In this poll, the Democratic edge is nine points. That may or may not be on the high side, although it is similar to other recent national polls conducted by NBC News and the Wall Street Journal, which puts Democrats up 11 percentage points and the Pew Research Center, with Democrats up by 13 percent.

Don't suppose you have a link to the article, so I don't have to go searching for it myself? I kinda like to see things like who wrote the article and the full context it was written in rather than trust that you picked the one single paragraph that accurately reflects the issue.

Um... This is still simply the sampling of those being polled. It does not tell us if that sample accurately reflects the nation as a whole, much less those who will be voting in the next election. It's kinda circular to respond to a claim that the polls are oversampling Democrats by saying that said ratio is accurate because there were more Democrats in the polls. Actually, it's not "kinda circular", it is. It's not really people as a whole self identifying as Democrats more today, but people in the polls doing so. We can put forth a whole set of speculative ideas as to why that's happening, but as I stated earlier, it would be foolish to think these numbers are at all representative of the voting public.

Oh. But on second thought, you go ahead and think this means that Obama is a sure thing. ****. You don't even need to bother voting since he's so far ahead! Yes. Please make sure everyone knows that Obama is so far ahead in the polls that Romney has no chance.

I'm in the midst of doing a set of upgrades. So I've got a few minutes between steps to read/post, but not a ton of time for searching for a web site which Joph presumably was visiting when he copy/pasted the quote in the first place. I just don't see the point in doing a past of one paragraph from some online source, but then not providing a link to the source.

As to the source. Pretty much what I expected. I mean, we're either to believe that the nation as a whole suddenly increased their affiliation with the Democratic party by like 5% just in the last month (pretty much impossible) *or* the polls are not reflecting the nation as a whole. It shouldn't be hard to noodle out which is the better bet.

Given that I'm in Illinois, I really don't need to bother voting for president.

Same with us Massholes. It's actually Elizabeth Warren that is inspiring me to bother with voting this year.

Edited, Aug 11th 2012 2:08am by Omegavegeta

____________________________

"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin

Well, Romney wasn't doing a great job of inspiring the tea party crowd, so there ya go. Doubt he helps Romney gain many undecideds, buy he's more palpable than another Palin & solidifies the base a bit.

On a Mormon-Catholic Republican ticket no less.

____________________________

"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin

Well, Romney wasn't doing a great job of inspiring the tea party crowd, so there ya go. Doubt he helps Romney gain many undecideds, buy he's more palpable than another Palin & solidifies the base a bit.

On a Mormon-Catholic Republican ticket no less.

A Catholic Republican? I wish I wasn't too lazy to try and dig up all the quotes when JFK was running about how having a catholic in the white house would be a terrible idea since he would answer to the pope.

Election's over. Thanks for making it trivial to set up the out of touch rich v middle class dynamic guys. The only way it would have been easier was if you morons had run a Thurston Howell III/Scrooge McDuck ticket. Ryan is a good 25 second sound byte, but that's literally as deep as it goes.

____________________________

Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? ***. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

Ryan looks like he could be played by Jake Gyllenhaal in a movie eight years from now.

____________________________

publiusvarus wrote:

we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.

So Romney's campaign made an app just to announce the VP with so you'd know sooner than anyone not having the app and now the press knows before it's released through the app?

____________________________

Theophany wrote:YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU. someproteinguy wrote:Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist. Astarin wrote:One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.

I'm starting to suspect they're just intentionally trying to make themselves look bad by now. I'm half expecting Romney to slip on a banana peel during his next public appearance.

____________________________

Theophany wrote:YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU. someproteinguy wrote:Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist. Astarin wrote:One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.

Speaking of Condi, this ticket now has NO foreign policy experience or anything to offer on the international stage. Ryan hasn't even served on a remotely international affairs oriented committee while in the House.

Back to my first post in the thread, another national poll (Investor's Business Daily/Christian Science Monitor/TIPP Poll) finds Obama +7. Must be all those wide swings Gbaji tells me about... that all go for a single candidate, it seems.

Election's over. Thanks for making it trivial to set up the out of touch rich v middle class dynamic guys. The only way it would have been easier was if you morons had run a Thurston Howell III/Scrooge McDuck ticket. Ryan is a good 25 second sound byte, but that's literally as deep as it goes.

Out of curiosity, whom would you have picked (assuming you wanted Romney to win)? I've been mulling it over for weeks and I could never decide. Is the field really that thin, or the "base" really that hard to figure?

____________________________

In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

Speaking of Condi, this ticket now has NO foreign policy experience or anything to offer on the international stage. Ryan hasn't even served on a remotely international affairs oriented committee while in the House.

It's not like they could still point at Obama for sucking at foreign policy stuff anymore anyway, might as well pass it by entirely and hope nobody talks about it, right?

____________________________

Theophany wrote:YOU'RE AN ELITIST @#%^ AETHIEN, NO WONDER YOU HAVE NO FRIENDS AND PEOPLE HATE YOU. someproteinguy wrote:Aethien you take more terrible pictures than a Japanese tourist. Astarin wrote:One day, Maz, you'll learn not to click on anything Aeth links.